Mockery of Democracy
By Dr Qaisar Rashid

AS it seems so, the prevalent democratic system in Pakistan is essentially a President-centred system. It appears less a parliamentary but more a Presidential form of government. The system calls for a dummy Prime Minister who has to appease simultaneously two Presidents: Firstly, the President of Pakistan and secondly, the President of Pakistan Muslim League (Q).

The former 14th Prime Minister (PM), Mir Zafarullah Jamali, seemingly failed to meet the “expectations”, as envisioned before assigning him the task of PM under the pretext of a ‘representative of a smaller province’. Secondly, the ghost of Junejo was also seen surfacing inside him haunting the military establishment. Thirdly, he was considered a useless commodity to bring success to the present system to cash the election-2007. Fourthly, nearness to the MMA was a final straw that broke camel’s back. That was why, perhaps, he became the common foe of the ‘two Presidents’. Hence, his fate was thrown away to the dustbin of the Pakistani politics, like that of the former thirteen PMs.

The problems of Jamali actually started when he accepted a role of a tailor-made Prime Minister and started uttering the word “Boss”. Moreover, his fellow parliamentarians used to consider him a stooge of the Chaudhries of Gujrat. From that stature of subservience, both the Presidents could not allow him to assert his own position as a PM. He succumbed to the pressure emanating from the both to get retired. Interestingly, before retiring, he made sure that Humayun Khan, a common perceived political opponent of himself and the Chaudhries would not make a way to the left-vacant post. Hence, one final success on his part to save Punjab from another political power centre is still less recognized!

After his resignation, the next forty-five days of interim set-up are crucial, before a new PM takes oath. In Balochistan, a feeling of deprivation may mount further. In Sindh, both the MMA and the Sindh Government are in head on collision. In Punjab, the spate of violence has been introduced through murder of Pir Binyamin. In NWFP, the stances of the MMA and Chief Minister have challenged the President-hovered bodies like National Security Council (NSC). Moreover, in Wana, after the satellite-guided death of Nek Muhammad, a sense of grievance against the centre has deepened more, besides against Karzai’s Government.

The way Jamali has tendered resignation has aired one message: for a PM, under the existing system, a department of ethics should be erected with an assigned job of teaching the outgoing PM to address to the nation through radio and television to evaluate his successes and failures alike, besides conveying the reasons of any such resignation. Jamali’s resignation cannot be justified as a part of democracy. He should have been delivered a charge-sheet to enable him to either defend his position or surrender. As the people of Pakistan are not being taken into confidence, they are becoming least concerned about national political affairs. The departure of Jamali was not in a befitting manner, unlike his entry. A sense of humiliation was visible on his face.

While addressing the media, at the party secretariat, when he was interrupted through a question, he forgot what he was speaking and said: “now, please clap and welcome Ch Shujaat “ (to address you). However, suddenly, he got his senses back and found the lost end of his speech. A PM of Pakistan should not have left his office in this way. If this happens to one, the same can happen to the other.

Jamali was also wrong when he said, at the aforementioned occasion, that the change was an internal affair of the Pakistan Muslim League. In fact, the event has left an ugly mark at the countenance of the country and has once again proved that Pakistan is misfit for democracy. It has reflected that Pakistani politics is, in essence, a politics of inclusion and exclusion. It is deprived of a sense of tolerance and flexibility. Moreover, either inclusion of Jamali was a wrong decision or his ‘accepted’ exclusion is wrong. Something is wrong somewhere.

Another interesting aspect of the Pakistani style politics is presence of a standing-queue of aspiring candidates to sit directly on the vacant chair of the PM. The people who cannot win even one seat without backing of the establishment are aspirant of becoming PM. Moreover, the in-house change is a new tool to manoeuvre. Two reasons can be sorted out for not opting for dissolution of assemblies. First, one can criticize that the installed system failed within two years and secondly, the MMA can fetch more seats in the next elections causing problem to all the participants of war on terrorism. Additionally, it is still to be seen how good a technocrat PM, like in India, can run internal political affairs of a country like Pakistan where, unlike in India, the political institutions are not strong. It is obvious that the Pakistanis, as a nation, are still far from understanding the difference between the evolved democracy and the manoeuvred democracy. The lasting democracy is the evolved one — the required one. The requisite attached virtue is to observe patience and wait for one’s turn.

Today, even a newspaper hawker, while selling a newspaper of few pages apprising people of Jamali’s resignation, is laughing at the system but at the same time is worried about his own future. He acknowledges that the politicians and the establishment are powerful enough to bring about change of their desire time and again. However, he asks a question: whether the Pakistanis did sacrifice their men and material to get Pakistan for enjoying themselves these political games? Rather clapping at the juggling, contrary to the request of Jamali, he begs for one thing: please do not make mockery of democracy!●

The writer is a Lahore based, medical doctor and a freelance writer. He is a regular contributor to 'Pakistan Times.'
E-Mail: qaisarrashid@yahoo.com

© 2004 Dr Qaiser Rashid